English
"There is an offense of wrong-doing for a fully ordained nun in both cases, and no offense for a female trainee or a female novice." This is the same method in other similar cases. 191. Is it to be said that because it is stated, "having made arrangements for sport, due to worldly pleasure and friendly intimacy," the unwholesome mind is a worldly fault? It should not be said. The word "for sport" is stated for the most part. And in the ancient commentary, it is said, "three minds, three feelings." Or, at the time of making arrangements, a monk makes arrangements for sport, there is an offense for the monk when entering another village, or when exceeding half a yojana. Or he has a wholesome mind, reflecting, or seeing stupas and so on. Or he has an indeterminate mind, sleeping due to fatigue. Thus, it should be understood that three types of minds are included. The explanation of the rule concerning boarding a boat is finished. 9. The explanation of the rule concerning cooked food. 192. "Ceṭaka" means children. "Taruṇapotaka" means the ancients. It is written, "This was laid down to cut off the faction of evil monks, therefore an offense is stated only for the five kinds of food." 194-7. "Prepared" does not mean by request, but by conversation and so on. Therefore, by this rule, there is no offense. Referring to that, it is said, "no offense in all cases." "They give, being pleased there according to the conversation; this is not 'cooked food,' it is permissible," so said Dhammasiri Thera, because it was stated in the first rule. But Upatissa Thera said, "The other also is permissible." But in the ancient commentary, it is said, "Because Devadatta habitually eats food prepared by nuns there, therefore, making this incident the cause, this rule was laid down." . The explanation of the training rule on cooked food is finished. 10. The explanation of the training rule on sitting in private 198. The reading is: "And by Upananda's fourth training rule." The explanation of the training rule on sitting in private is finished. The third section, the section on advice, is finished in the order of explanation. 4. The section on meals 1. The explanation of the training rule on meals at a lodging 203-4. "Of a group" means by a group. "Being remorseful" means that there should be an escape here, and it is said "being remorseful" in the sense of making the determination, "we do not know that." Just as the venerable Upāli, by grasping the principle, said, "There is no offense, friends, by a dream" (Pārā. 78), why did the elder not determine, "There is no offense for a sick person"? Because the Vinaya enactment is not within his authority, because it was rejected as "this is not his occasion," and because the training rule was incomplete. For only when the first Pārājika training rule was enacted completely did that elder say, "There is no offense by a dream," in accordance with the words "except by a dream." Since there is no oppression of the donors only when it is not specified as "as much as needed," it is said, "not specified as much as needed." 208. It is written: " 'One day on the road' is said referring to only one," and " 'This is the method' means to show the method that has been stated, 'going and returning,' and so on," and " 'being pure-minded, one may eat a normal meal,' " and " 'for a non-sick person who perceives himself as sick, it arises from the body.' " The explanation of the training rule on meals at a lodging is finished. 2. The explanation of the training rule on group meals 209-218. "Hidden and covered" means not obvious. "One with a son" means one meal for one person; it is not said, "I am invited by another." Some say that if four lay followers invite four bhikkhus separately and give them food while they are within arm's reach, it is a group meal, because it is said, "If they take it together, it is a group meal" (Pāci. Aṭṭha. 217-218). That does not seem appropriate. "When a group is asked for one In that taking, by this training rule, there is an offense. In separate taking, it is written: "By the asking for fine food, sauce, and rice." It is said: "The asking for a discharge is permitted in the commentary due to the origin story. There, an offense occurs due to sauce, rice, etc." That is not suitable. Why? Because in the Parivāra (pari. 168) both aspects are mentioned. Therefore, in the commentary, "permitted" is wrongly stated. It should be said: "It is clear in the origin story itself," and "not stated in the word analysis." Those who take together, even if they have received food, if others wait until they take, they are indeed taking together. They say: "If he goes, there is no offense." Here it is said: "Acceptance is the criterion here." Then why is it said in the Pāli: "What is called a group meal? Where four… …eat, that is called a group meal" (pāci. 218)? It is said: "Where" is a locative case in the sense of use. "Four" is an indication of the minimum number for a group. "Of the five meals" is an indication of a meal sufficient for an offense. "Invited with any meal" is an indication of an improper invitation. However, since a group meal is stated in terms of invitation, it is said: "It is stated that those invited eat." But it is not said: "Having asked for any meal, they eat," because it is clear in the origin story itself. The connection should be understood as "what they eat." "They eat there" is a rule for the recipient. For bhikkhus do not eat what is not accepted. This means: "There is an offense of pācittiya for the group due to food accepted from them." They make an arrival patch by sewing it with a plain thread and keep it. There, in the leeward side, they rub it with their hands so that it becomes a single layer. "Valeti" means "turns over." "Parivattana" means making the thread turn over for easy grasping by those taking thread, and turning over the patch for easy sewing by those sewing the patch. A new robe maker is intended here, not i He crosses over. "Having asked Bimbisāra, while the preparations were being made, time passed. Later, after the rule on group meals was laid down, he approached the Blessed One and asked," they say, otherwise it would contradict the commentary. 220. "Two or three as one," and "even those who accepted an improper invitation," and so on, these words indicate that there is no offense due to an improper invitation, but an offense due to a request. The uninvited fourth, that is, the one for whom there is an uninvited fourth. This method applies everywhere. Having seated, means having made them sit. The four-fold allowance at the time of offering robes, the four-fold allowance at the time of making robes, and so on. And those, meaning those meals for which there is no doubt. Great Elder, meaning one who has received higher ordination. Having stood, a sign was shown by standing. Going here and there, meaning going to the bhikkhus in the streets and so on. However, in some books for this training rule, the reading is: "I allow, bhikkhus, to partake of a group meal at the time of offering robes. Thus, this was by the Blessed One for the bhikkhus." In some, after saying "to partake," the reading is: "And thus, bhikkhus, you should recite this training rule." This is better. The explanation of the training rule on group meals is finished. 3. The explanation of the training rule on successive meals 221. Determined, meaning constantly occurring. Badara-sāḷava, mixed with jujube powder, sugar, and so on. By the worker of the deed, meaning by the worker of the deed. 226. "Having determined, take it." Here, the ancient elders said: "Without determining in the presence of the Blessed One, he left the house, and in the street, he determined it in the presence of another bhikkhu. However, when determining, it should be said: 'I give my meal expectation to so-and-so.' And the other should say: 'Use what belongs to him, or do as you deem fit.'" Among five fellow Dhamma-farers, meaning not seeing the fellow Dhamma-farer who is standing in front and with whom one wishes to determine, or in the presence of a layperson, or by oneself. Some say that one should eat after saying, "I make a choice for so-and-so among the five fellow-dhamma practitioners." In that case, it seems that the elder, sitting right there, would utter such a statement and then receive it. However, in the Mahāpaccariya and other commentaries, only a choice made in absence is mentioned, which aligns with the statement, "Therefore, Ānanda, make a choice and receive it." Nevertheless, in the Mātika-aṭṭhakathā (Kankhā. Aṭṭha. Paramparabhojana-sikkhāpada-vaṇṇanā), it is stated, "Therefore, that bhikkhu, to one of the five fellow-dhamma practitioners, saying 'I give my meal expectation to you' or 'I make a choice,' either directly, or saying 'I give to so-and-so' or 'I make a choice' indirectly," which indicates that it must be said in the presence of a fellow-dhamma practitioner, not by oneself. Since this latter method also aligns with the ancient commentaries, the meaning here should be understood according to the Mātika-aṭṭhakathā. Although here it seems that the invitation is improper according to the statement, "Those people... gave food," it should be understood that the elder was invited with food due to the reason for his scruple. Otherwise, it would contradict the later statement, "He eats two or three invitations together," and the section on blamelessness. 229. Here is the consideration: "Another person takes the bowl, it should not be given." According to this statement, an improper invitation in the latter part is not useful; it is only useful in the former part. So, in "Venerable sir, please come tomorrow," which is the improper invitation? Therefore, the intention here is the criterion. No, it is not, according to the statement, "Having gone for alms and received food, he eats, there is an offense.